20:0354(36)NG - NFFE Local 405 and Army Aviation and Army Troop Support Command -- 1985 FLRAdec NG

[ v20 p354 ] 20:0354(36)NG
The decision of the Authority follows:

20 FLRA No. 36
NATIONAL FEDERATION OF FEDERAL
EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 405
Union
and
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY, U.S.
ARMY AVIATION SYSTEMS COMMAND
AND U.S. ARMY TROOP SUPPORT
COMMAND
Agency
Case No. 0-NG-1078
DECISION AND ORDER ON NEGOTIABILITY ISSUE
The petition for review in this case comes before the Federal Labor
Relations Authority (the Authority) pursuant to section 7105(a)(2)(E) of
the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute (the Statute),
and presents an issue concerning the negotiability of the following
Union proposal: /1/
Article VII, Section 1, 1.: Representational duties to
bargaining unit employees of other Commands having an exclusive
with the Union. Official time for this function will be
authorized by the Commander on an individual basis.
Upon careful consideration of the entire record, including the parties'
contentions, the Authority makes the following determination.
The record in this case indicates that the Union holds exclusive
recognition for four separate bargaining units of Department of the Army
employees in St. Louis as follows: the U.S. Army Aviation Systems
Command (AVSCOM); the U.S. Army Troop Support Command (TROSCOM); a
detachment of the U.S. Army Information Systems Command (ISC); and the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, St. Louis District.
As relevant herein, Article VII, Section 1 of the AVSCOM-Local 405
collective bargaining agreement authorizes official time for Union
representatives employed by AVSCOM for various representational
functions listed in the agreement concerning AVSCOM employees. An
identical provision in the TROSCOM-Local 405 collective bargaining
agreement applies to representation of TROSCOM employees by Union
representatives employed by TROSCOM.
The proposal here in dispute would amend both the AVSCOM and TROSCOM
collective bargaining agreements to authorize official time on an
individual basis for a Union representative employed by either AVSCOM or
TROSCOM to represent employees in bargaining units other than the one in
which such Union representative is employed. While the Union claims
that the intent of the proposal was only to permit Union representatives
employed by AVSCOM to represent TROSCOM employees and vice versa, the
express language of the proposal is not limited to AVSCOM and TROSCOM
but applies to other commands in which the Union holds an exclusive
recognition. However, such distinction is not relevant in this case
since under either interpretation of the proposal the essential issue to
be addressed concerns whether section 7131(d) of the Statute /2/
authorizes negotiation of official time for union representatives
employed in one bargaining unit to represent employees employed in a
different bargaining unit.
In this respect the disputed proposal herein is to the same effect as
the proposal found nonnegotiable by the Authority in American Federation
of Government Employees, Local 1698 and Department of the Navy, Aviation
Supply Office, Consolidated Civilian Personnel Division, 17 FLRA No.
84(1985), petition for review filed sub nom. American Federation of
Government Employees v. FLRA, No. 85-3341 (3rd Cir. June 17, 1985). In
that case, the union sought to authorize official time pursuant to
section 7131(d) of the Statute for a union official employed in one of
four bargaining units represented by the union at a single activity to
inter alia, represent the employees in the other three units. The
Authority, relying on its earlier decision in Department of the Navy,
Naval Construction Battalion Center, Port Hueneme, California and
National Association of Government Employees, Local R12-29, 14 FLRA
360(1984), determined that no bargaining obligation arose pursuant to
section 7131(d) of the Statute in such circumstances. Hence, contrary
to the Union's contention in this case, and, based on Aviation Supply
Office and Port Hueneme, and the reasons and cases cited therein,
section 7131(d) does not authorize bargaining on the disputed proposal
herein.
Accordingly pursuant to section 2424.10 of the Authority's Rules and
Regulations, IT IS ORDERED that the Union's petition for review be, and
it hereby is, dismissed.
Issued, Washington, D.C., September 26, 1985
(s) HENRY B. FRAZIER III
Henry B. Frazier III, Acting
Chairman
(s) WILLIAM J. MCGINNIS JR.
William J. McGinnis, Jr. Member
FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY
--------------- FOOTNOTES$ ---------------
/1/ During the pendency of this appeal the Union withdrew from
consideration two additional subsections of Article VII, Section 1.
Thus, these two subsections will not be considered further herein.
/2/ Section 7131(d) of the Statute provides:
(d) Except as provided in the preceding subsections of this
section--
(1) any employee representing an exclusive representative, or
(2) in connection with any other matter covered by this
chapter, any employee in an appropriate unit represented by an
exclusive representative, shall be granted o